Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Ghostbusters (2016) | Movie News/ Discussion *Now Spoilers*

123468

Comments

  • BrackBrack Posts: 868
    Mr_Cosmic said:

    Didn't they kill off Bill Murray's character?

    I guess so. He fell out a window but they never showed the body. No body no death! :)
    Maybe in a ghost cameo in the next one?
    That would work well if he's still a sceptic even after death.
  • matchkitJOHNmatchkitJOHN Posts: 1,030
    Mr_Cosmic said:

    Didn't they kill off Bill Murray's character?

    I guess so. He fell out a window but they never showed the body. No body no death! :)
    Maybe in a ghost cameo in the next one?
    The ghost who doesn't believe he's a ghost!
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    I'm calling it now:

    Bill Murray will never appear in another Ghostbusters sequel. Mark my words.
  • matchkitJOHNmatchkitJOHN Posts: 1,030

    I'm calling it now:

    Bill Murray will never appear in another Ghostbusters sequel. Mark my words.

    Yeah. He's done.
  • luke52luke52 Posts: 1,392

    I'm calling it now:

    Bill Murray will never appear in another Ghostbusters sequel. Mark my words.

    Yeah. He's done.
    I wish they'd slimed him one last time.

    I did quite like it tho. A lot more then I expected I would. Chris Hemsworth was really funny. Couldn't take my eyes of Kate McKinnon. Melissa McCarthy is quite annoying in general. I don't relate it at all to the originals, it's its own thing and that's fine with me. I rate it below the originals, but it never was gonna be as good for me. Still fun tho.
  • CaptShazamCaptShazam Posts: 1,178
    This seems like a movie that will just disapper. It got unfairly trashed early and a lot of people wanted it to work (for various reasons) but in the end, it will just be an ok movie.

    It got beat by a cartoon in week one and a 2nd Star Trek reboot sequel in week two.

    Sure there will probably be more Ghostbusters but with increasingly dimishing returns.
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    edited July 2016
    Interesting that the only execs in Hollywood that think the movie is doing well is Sony. Box-office analysts and rival studios are skeptical that Sony has relaunched the GB franchise. $46 million is a very weak start for a movie with a production budget of $144 million. Ideally it should have opened to $60 million+. Ghostbusters now has to earn $375 to $400 million worldwide to break even for Sony which means it needs to do sizable business overseas, and looks like it will top out in the $130 million range domestically. To further hurt its global BO, the film isn't going to open in China at all (neither did the original). The film isn't going to recover.

    As for the film itself? From what I hear, every male character in this movie is either inept, a creep, or the butt of a joke. Sounds a bit misandrist to me. Chris Hemsworth is the vacuous eye candy, Andy Garcia as the Mayor of NY is a pompous and incompetent buffoon, and the villain is a disaffected loser who lashes out at the world because it won't validate him so he turns into a giant version of the movie's logo ghost and gets busted in the balls for the win...

    Many reviewers say this film is entirely serviceable, but only occasionally fun and often joyless, like it was 'good enough' just to cast four women in traditionally male roles. Sounds more like pasteurized, processed, homogenized, "safe" comedy enriched with fake controversy for your consuming pleasure. Even Bill Murray wasn't funny. How is that even possible? Glad my teenage daughter had no interest. She saw 'Lights Out' instead.

    Next.
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    Ha! I expect the jokes will be funnier and it will do better financially overall at least.
  • ChrisBeckettChrisBeckett Posts: 535
    So, is anyone calling for the end of the Star Trek franchise? I ask, since, statistically speaking, the percentage of its opening domestic gross as compared to its budget is exactly the same as that of the new Ghostbusters (with all those scary women...)
  • CaptShazamCaptShazam Posts: 1,178

    So, is anyone calling for the end of the Star Trek franchise? I ask, since, statistically speaking, the percentage of its opening domestic gross as compared to its budget is exactly the same as that of the new Ghostbusters (with all those scary women...)

    Yes, I am - but only the movie aspect of the franchise. The films and new continuity are dreadful.

    I am excited about the new television show.
  • MattMatt Posts: 4,457

    So, is anyone calling for the end of the Star Trek franchise? I ask, since, statistically speaking, the percentage of its opening domestic gross as compared to its budget is exactly the same as that of the new Ghostbusters (with all those scary women...)

    Yes, I am - but only the movie aspect of the franchise. The films and new continuity are dreadful.

    I am excited about the new television show.
    I know this is a discussion for another thread, but aside from the death swap in ST:ITD, I actually like this new series of movies. Granted, I've never been a Star Trek fan.

    M
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967

    So, is anyone calling for the end of the Star Trek franchise? I ask, since, statistically speaking, the percentage of its opening domestic gross as compared to its budget is exactly the same as that of the new Ghostbusters (with all those scary women...)

    I don't think so, but it is having the weakest outing of the 3 new films in the rebooted franchise which has executives calling the the 3rd best opening... the spin is strong with this one. We'll see. This franchise has a lot iterations and a lot of staying power and it isn't merely a reboot of a 32 year old beloved film (Ghostbusters).
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    Also a a production cost of $185M, Star Trek Beyond will be fine, particularly since the Skydance/Bad Robot series has spiked the franchise’s appeal overseas, moving its international B.O. from $128M to $238.6M. In addition, Paramount received $75 million in TV, digital, and social media promotional support from U.S. brand partners: Hewlett Packard Enterprise, VIZIO, Rocket Mortgage by Quicken Loans, Bing, and Enterprise Rent-A-Car. Eastern Airlines provided a 737 Star Trek Beyond branded plane to jet the cast to the world premiere in San Diego. China will also boost the BO for this movie in substantial ways. I think it has a lot more going for it than GB.
  • MattMatt Posts: 4,457
    Side bar: think about the franchises Hemsworth is now associated with:

    - Thor
    - Avengers
    - Star Trek
    - Ghostbusters
    - Huntsmen
    - Vacation

    M
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    Ooh, did Vacation actually restart that franchise? It did earn back triple its budget.

    If there's a sequel, it demands cousin Eddie (Randy Quaid)!
  • MattMatt Posts: 4,457

    Ooh, did Vacation actually restart that franchise? It did earn back triple its budget.

    If there's a sequel, it demands cousin Eddie (Randy Quaid)!

    I haven't heard anything about a sequel, but it's part of the Vacation franchise. I hope there's no sequel.

    M
  • Matt said:

    Ooh, did Vacation actually restart that franchise? It did earn back triple its budget.

    If there's a sequel, it demands cousin Eddie (Randy Quaid)!

    I haven't heard anything about a sequel, but it's part of the Vacation franchise. I hope there's no sequel.

    M
    I don't know, I'd watch a sequel starring the car.
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    edited July 2016

    Also a a production cost of $185M, Star Trek Beyond will be fine, particularly since the Skydance/Bad Robot series has spiked the franchise’s appeal overseas, moving its international B.O. from $128M to $238.6M. In addition, Paramount received $75 million in TV, digital, and social media promotional support from U.S. brand partners: Hewlett Packard Enterprise, VIZIO, Rocket Mortgage by Quicken Loans, Bing, and Enterprise Rent-A-Car. Eastern Airlines provided a 737 Star Trek Beyond branded plane to jet the cast to the world premiere in San Diego. China will also boost the BO for this movie in substantial ways. I think it has a lot more going for it than GB.

    Well. There's always merchandising.

    I would guess there will be more kids (maybe not just girls) out as Ghostbusters this Halloween than as Starfleet. But, we'll see.
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    David_D said:

    Well. There's always merchandising.

    I would guess there will be more kids (maybe not just girls) out as Ghostbusters this Halloween than as Starfleet. But, we'll see.

    Maybe the male classic version are selling, but apparently not the girl GB's. Interesting that Variety has no numbers to back up the claims while anecdotal evidence of the toys being on clearance at Target, Walmart, and other retail chains tells a different story. Even on eBay, none of the female action figures has more than a single bid.

    image
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884

    David_D said:

    Well. There's always merchandising.

    I would guess there will be more kids (maybe not just girls) out as Ghostbusters this Halloween than as Starfleet. But, we'll see.

    Maybe the male classic version are selling, but apparently not the girl GB's. Interesting that Variety has no numbers to back up the claims while anecdotal evidence of the toys being on clearance at Target, Walmart, and other retail chains tells a different story. Even on eBay, none of the female action figures has more than a single bid.

    image
    Are you claiming that Variety is lying?
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    David_D said:

    David_D said:

    Well. There's always merchandising.

    I would guess there will be more kids (maybe not just girls) out as Ghostbusters this Halloween than as Starfleet. But, we'll see.

    Maybe the male classic version are selling, but apparently not the girl GB's. Interesting that Variety has no numbers to back up the claims while anecdotal evidence of the toys being on clearance at Target, Walmart, and other retail chains tells a different story. Even on eBay, none of the female action figures has more than a single bid.

    image
    Are you claiming that Variety is lying?
    I believe they are saying what the distributors reported. I am also sure that there were probably boat loads of toys distributed to retailers. Doesn't mean consumers are buying them. Ae you saying I'm completely wrong?
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    edited July 2016

    David_D said:

    David_D said:

    Well. There's always merchandising.

    I would guess there will be more kids (maybe not just girls) out as Ghostbusters this Halloween than as Starfleet. But, we'll see.

    Maybe the male classic version are selling, but apparently not the girl GB's. Interesting that Variety has no numbers to back up the claims while anecdotal evidence of the toys being on clearance at Target, Walmart, and other retail chains tells a different story. Even on eBay, none of the female action figures has more than a single bid.

    image
    Are you claiming that Variety is lying?
    I believe they are saying what the distributors reported. I am also sure that there were probably boat loads of toys distributed to retailers. Doesn't mean consumers are buying them. Ae you saying I'm completely wrong?
    No, they are reporting on sales. Not distribution. This is not about unreturnable comics in the direct market. They are reporting on sales. I trust Variety to understand what the word "selling" means, and to use it accurately. And if they are going to run a story about how these toys are selling better than expected, that they mean exactly that.
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    So what does "better than expected" mean to you?
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    edited July 2016

    So what does "better than expected" mean to you?

    Exactly what it sounds like. That they are selling better than expected. Well enough to be worthy of Variety-- who reports on the business-- to report on in this way. Here is their lede:
    Mattel is reporting strong early sales for its line of toys based on the female-led “Ghostbusters” — from both boys and girls.
    Again, Variety chose to run this article. They don't seem to think that Mattel is lying. Or that the retailers are going to refute what Mattel is claiming. Are you? Are you saying they are logrolling rather than reporting?

    Because, I've got to be honest, right now, with this kind of skepticism on a pretty straightforward report in a trade like this, you sound like those people who accuse Disney of paying off critics for positive reviews of Marvel movies.
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    edited July 2016
    Glad you're being honest right now. I assure you I've never suspected that Disney paid off any critics to call BvS the turd that it was.
    “We’re thrilled with the response to the new ‘Ghostbusters’ toy line,” said Joe Lawandus, senior VP of design and marketing for Mattel’s Toy Box. “We worked closely with Sony to ensure each figure featured authentic details from the movie including a wearable proton pack. The early momentum shows the product is resonating with ‘Ghostbusters’ fans!”
    Mattel could also be posturing to appease their own shareholders, which makes it hard to judge just how well the new film performed or the toys for that matter.

    I realize it goes against your predisposed conclusion to do so, but if you want anecdotal reports search "Ghostbuster toy sales" and see how many 'news' outlets are parroting this report despite it showing no evidence of its claims. Just saying toy sales were "better than expected" could simply mean "expectations were pretty low" and when the toys are on clearance before the film even comes out, I'm guessing expectations were indeed quite low. The lack of secondary market demand indicates this to be the case.

    Your mileage may vary.

    image

    Here are week #2 at the box office for comparisons...

    image
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    @bralinator Those reading along can judge for themselves who has a predisposed conclusion at play.

    At the end of the day, I am predisposed to believe that an exec at Mattel- that is the source, not the filmmakers or movie studio- would not risk their relationship with Variety and credibility overall by claiming that one of their licensed products had strong early sales, and that was also quoted. Not just exceeding expectations-- if that was not the case. There is too little for Mattel to gain to run the risk of embarrassing themselves if the retailers refuted the claim.

    If you want to believe otherwise, then so it goes.
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    Okay, thanks David. I will believe what I see with my own eyes instead of everything an executive in a trade magazine says who has something to lose.
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    edited July 2016

    Okay, thanks David. I will believe what I see with my own eyes instead of everything an executive in a trade magazine says who has something to lose.

    Got it. And yet, that "believe what I see with your own eyes" approach didn't keep you from judging this movie as misandrist based on what others said about it.
  • CaptShazamCaptShazam Posts: 1,178
    regardless if the toys are flying off the shelves or if the Mattle executive is embelishing a little, this is bad reporting by Variety.

    After the exec said the toys were selling above expectations, the first question asked should have been "what were the expectations and what are the early sales figures?" If the exec does not give that info, you don't publish this.

    Sales reports articles without numbers are worthless.
Sign In or Register to comment.